Search

WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

I have many issues with the double blind testing, the problem is that humans have a very short memory of sound.
You can only remember around 7 seconds of it.
Therefore when double blind testing is done where people are just played different songs or the same song on two different pieces of equipment.... it has to be quite different for anyone to be able to notice. But it doesn't mean that the differences aren't there....
Its just like if you play an FPS game with 90fps vs 100fps.... if you have the FPS counter off it may be hard to tell which is getting more fps, but it doesn't mean that one setup isn't providing more performance.
This has to do with human perception overall, and as far as I have read... such double blind tests have never been done and reported on (atleast in the world of audio) where the test subjects are to familiarize themselves with the audio tracks, and then specific parts are played back to them back to back using different gear and they have to decide which sounds better or if they sound the same...

Member

As far as I have read... such double blind tests have never been done and reported on (atleast in the world of audio) where the test subjects are to familiarize themselves with the audio tracks, and then specific parts are played back to them back to back using different gear and they have to decide which sounds better or if they sound the same...

Major Contributor

I found Amir's findings to be clear enough and not very open to debate.
I prefer his findings over subjective ones because of the numorous variables found in the latter method.
A LOT of people on the internet can be wrong even if they find 'similar' things.

Subjective findings can still be very usefull IF they are done truly blind (for the listener) and spread over a wide number of 'tests' where changes are made by someone else randomly and unknowingly to the listener/evaluator.

Have done that twice, once by accident. Takes months to complete and you may have a stab at the results.

Last edited: Nov 26, 2018

People have a tendency to overestimate their hearing capabilities.
Use your ears to listen to music not as an analyzer.

New Member

Thanks for the input. I contacted the seller and he's willing to take it back. I just haven;t sent it back yet. He states there was nothing wrong with it. Topping won't deal with anyone but the original owner.

I tried lowering the volume from the laptop out to the DAC, but the speakers still distort. Oddly, they don't distort as bad o 24/44.1 material, though I still hear it.

Hi, I have Edifier S2000 and I am considering buying Topping D10. I am curious where the problem was. Did you try to use DAC/speakers with other device (using digital input) to determine what device is wrong? Have you tried coax output? Thank you for info.

New Member

Hello, I just want to share with you all the opamp upgrade I made to my Topping D10 to a Burson Audio V6 Vivid . I do not Have any messuring tool but in my opinion I found it more balanced. No bright highs or too much crisp ditail. I found it less agressive or frontal. Medium range are more open and detailed and found more pleasent sound stage.

Actually I have measured burson v6 vivid. It's really good for discrete. It can go 0.0001% THD. And has very low noise. I think the level of performance is similar to opa827. Distortion can be a bit higher than opa827 or modern opamps. But by no means it's bad. It's actually very competent in this level of performance.

Subjective description: opa827 can be more bassy than v6 but v6 as clean and smooth. 5534 is more grainy and crisp(can be good or bad). IDK if it's jfet input or bjt input but it sounds like a very good bjt input opamp to me. And a very low current noise one. Not necessarily worth the price. But it's definitely not bad.

Major Contributor

Actually I have measured burson v6 vivid. It's really good for discrete. It can go 0.0001% THD. And has very low noise. I think the level of performance is similar to opa827. Distortion can be a bit higher than opa827 or modern opamps. But by no means it's bad. It's actually very competent in this level of performance.

Subjective description: opa827 can be more bassy than v6 but v6 as clean and smooth. 5534 is more grainy and crisp(can be good or bad). IDK if it's jfet input or bjt input but it sounds like a very good bjt input opamp to me. And a very low current noise one. Not necessarily worth the price. But it's definitely not bad.

They measure the same. Not even in the higher frequency range after 35khz. One thing i encountered is that there is an amp called lisa3 and i also measured it. The frequency response is pure flat but the bass is much more prominent. I still can't explain why. Maybe i could find something in low frequency square wave or step response.

No. I could blind test it. It's really something. Especially when I changed all the opamps into opa827 the bass became just more prominent and overall warmer and smoother. I didn't have any to expect. I have tested many opamps lt1128 opa1611 opa211 4556 and many more. I did a project making an headphone amp. And in the process I spent over 1000 aud on opamps for testing. If i were imaging all these i must be stupid. Of course measurement is another part. They do measure different in some ways. But not in frequency response.
And the bass of Lisa3 sounds like 3db more and it's no way for anyone to not able to blind test it. Just like you listen to a 3db more bassy earphone. It does have bass control knob but i bypassed it by modifying the circuit and measured.

Addicted to Fun and Learning

But remember the difference are very marginal in with most scenarios. The most extreme can sound like 1-1.5db difference in frequency range just from swaping opamps. And some opamps sound almost the same.

Addicted to Fun and Learning

I did some. But not all of them.
In the beginning stage. I did want to verify if that was in my head or it's real. How i tested was i randomly select the opamp. Because those opamps are soic8 package, i need to read really hard to see it. So i didn't cheat myself of course why would i. The combination was opa827+ opa827 opa827+ opa2227p and opa211+opa2227p. I didn't test more but i called the first combination opa827+opa827. The other two combinations tho, i didn't call the name. But i wrote down the sound. And later on i tested these again. The sound description were consistent. It's not easy to do blind test with opamps. But i believe the above is good enough.

Major Contributor

No. I could blind test it. It's really something. Especially when I changed all the opamps into opa827 the bass became just more prominent and overall warmer and smoother. I didn't have any to expect. I have tested many opamps lt1128 opa1611 opa211 4556 and many more. I did a project making an headphone amp. And in the process I spent over 1000 aud on opamps for testing. If i were imaging all these i must be stupid. Of course measurement is another part. They do measure different in some ways. But not in frequency response.
And the bass of Lisa3 sounds like 3db more and it's no way for anyone to not able to blind test it. Just like you listen to a 3db more bassy earphone. It does have bass control knob but i bypassed it by modifying the circuit and measured.